Aftab Ansari @ Aftaf Ansari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19297 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-33 Year-2025 Thana- SONO District- Jamui ====================================================== Aftab Ansari @ Aftaf Ansari Son of Musho Miyan Resident of village - Mogal Chapri, P.S. Sono, District - Jamui ... ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Y Son of Ramdhani Pandit Resident of village - Mogal Chapri, P.S.- Sono, District - Jamui ... ... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, Advocate :

Mr. Purushottam Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Anil Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 10-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 17.01.2026 in connection with Sono P.S. Case No. 33 of 2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 137(2), 140(3) and 3(5) of BNS and Sections 4 and 12 of POCSO Act.

3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that O.P. No.2 lodged written application addressed to the Officer Incharge of Sono Police Station stating therein inter alia that his daughter 'x' aged 16 years went out of the house on 5.2.2025 at around 4.00 A.M. when her neighbour Aftab Ansari (petitioner), Aasir Miyan @ Chamru Miyan, Dablu Ansari, Kitabul Ansari, Alam Ansari, Atiya Khatoon, wife of Nasir Miyan, wife of Kitabul Ansari, wife of Alam, wife of Dablu Ansari under a conspiracy forcibly kidnapped his daughter on vehicle bearing registration no. BR46M9034 and the same was

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19297 of 2026(2) dt.10-04-2026 2/2 done by Aftab Ansari. He tried to locate his daughter but failed.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. It appears from the F.I.R. that there is no specific allegation against the petitioner.

5. Learned APP for the State, on the other hand, on the basis of the impugned order has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submits that victim in her statement recorded under Section 183 of BNSS has fully supported the case of the prosecution. Apart from that the medical report of the victim suggests that she has been sexually assaulted by the petitioner and date of birth of victim is 08.01.2009 which suggests that on the date of occurrence the victim was a minor.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Sono P.S. Case No. 33 of 2025 pending in the court of learned Exclusive Special Judge (POCSO), Jamui.

7. Prayer is refused.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Gaurav Sinha/- U T